[sage-devel] Re: 2.7 alpha^2?

[boothby]

  (2) There are some issues remaining with the new SAGE notebook:
(a) Auto-opening of next available port needs to be implemented
(b) I suspect running two SAGE notebooks from the same directory
  might not correctly give a lock message.

I'll give (a) a shot -- dunno if I'll get to (b) tonight.


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

[sage-devel] Small glitch in finite_field.py

[Juan M. Bello Rivas]

Hello,

I just noticed a very small typo in finite_field.py.  A patch is
attached.

I believe using pylint regularly would help in preventing these
glitches from appearing.

Best regards,

-- 
Juan M. Bello Rivas

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

--- sage/rings/finite_field.py.old  2007-07-09 10:44:18.0 +0200
+++ sage/rings/finite_field.py  2007-06-03 04:25:50.0 +0200
@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@
 name = normalize_names(1,name)
 
 if elem_cache is None:
-elem_cache = order  500
+elem_cahce = order  500
 
 key = (order, name, modulus)
 if cache.has_key(key):

[sage-devel] Re: predefined symbolic variable names

[Ted Kosan]

William wrote:

 From an implementation point of view, given the SAGE rules,
 it makes way more sense for 2.5*sin(1) to remain symbolic,
 since:
(1) this is what the backend simplification system (maxima) does,
 and
(2) 2.5 * sin(1) in SAGE is computed by making 2.5 symbolic,
 then doing the multiply formally.

 I'm not saying we shouldn't find a way to make 2.5 * sin(1) possibly
 be numerical.  I'm just remarking that this is a complicated issue
 and it definitely deserves further discussion.

I too noticed that for the kind of work high school students do, and
also the kind of work technical students do in general, obtaining
numerical approximates of symbolic expressions occurs very frequently.
 What I liked about Mathematica is that it made it very easy to obtain
numerical approximates of symbolic expressions.  For example, it
seemed to me that the N[] function's name was shortened to just N to
make it easy to type and the //N syntax placed after any expression
would return its numerical approximate.

I must admit, I also use to force Mathematica to return numerical
results by placing .0 after one of the numbers in an expression, but
this technique always had a hacked feeling to me.  When I discovered
the //N technique, I used it most of the time and was very happy with
it.

In SAGE, I have ended up using the numerical_approx() method as an
equivalent to N[] and //N in Mathematica, but I have found it not to
be as quick and easy to use.

Ted

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---